discover_devices

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds the useful detail that discovery happens via UDP broadcast, which is a specific network behavior. However, it does not mention the return format, potential blocking behavior, or error handling, leaving some behavioral aspects undisclosed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the verb, target, and method. It is concise with no filler or redundant information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple discovery tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It includes the key network mechanism (UDP broadcast) and specifies the device type, which helps differentiate it from sibling discovery tools. It does not explain return values, but given the simplicity and lack of output schema, this is not a significant gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema describes the timeout parameter with a clear description and default value, achieving 100% schema coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, but with full schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'Discover', the resource 'Dark Dragons Astronomy devices', and the method 'via UDP broadcast'. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool discover_alpaca_devices by specifying the brand/type of devices, making the purpose unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives clear context that this tool is for discovering Dark Dragons devices on the local network, which implies when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as pointing to discover_alpaca_devices for Alpaca devices. Thus it provides a clear context but no exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.